Prove to me.... (622)
crotalus_p: Actually he is kind of an idiot (no offence intended) if he wrote this as a serious thread ,
How can you say he is kind of an idiot,no offense intended. 
More of your Irish Blarney 
Offense intended 
------ This thread is Archived ------
We all got it, but our friend here is too busy twaddling back and forth between threads with the exclamations of "Not possible!!!!"
A bit of controlling nature I would surmise.
(sorta fun to watch the scurrying though, quite entertaining. <smile>)
Ohhhhh, the ego at work....
:::mine too::::------ This thread is Archived ------
krimsa: How can you not "debate" the issue? Do you expect us all just to magically agree that a god exists? Do you expect us all to agree that requiring someone to substantiate a negative premise is an illogical debate format?
No dear. But it wasn't a debate. It was a simple request, and if you couldn't fulfill it, or didn't want to fulfill it, a simple sorry would have sufficed I suppose.
No dear. But it wasn't a debate. It was a simple request, and if you couldn't fulfill it, or didn't want to fulfill it, a simple sorry would have sufficed I suppose.
In response to: This comment is clearly non-responsive and makes no sense.
It made perfect sense to me.
In response to: Why don’t you ask anyone who posted this point? I have already listed three different people.
I asked you because you seem to be the one still making an issue of it! I dont think anyone else cared all that much.. they said their bit and left!
------ This thread is Archived ------
UGh.. ignore the fact that I responded within the first quote up there if you can please lol!
------ This thread is Archived ------
NeWildflower: UGh.. ignore the fact that I responded within the first quote up there if you can please lol!
Who are you talking to?
------ This thread is Archived ------
This is the last time I will acknowledge the issue that some are simply not letting go of, and one last time I will try, and in yet one more way, to help folks understand that this is not a debate. Trying to prove me right or wrong is a waste of your time. You are basing your arguments on an assumed hypothesis folks, you do not even know if it is my belief or not. I am here in search of truth, not right or wrong.
I am not debating if "God" does, or does not, exist. Quite frankly I don't care if you think he does, or doesn't, or any of that. I have stated an assumed hypothesis and am searching for evidence of its truth. This is the key. I am not searching for right and wrong, I am searching for truth. There is a very big difference in that.
This assumed hypothesis has been defined further in this thread to be "God, as in 'a supreme being who created all things lovingly' does not exist". This assumption is made to seek evidence that refutes this claim. YES, this means it is assumed the defined God does exist for the sake of the search for evidence.
So again...
I am not here to argue on EITHER side of the does or does not debate, because I do not care one way or the other, what I care about here, and the only thing I care about here is the evidence that supports the assumed hypothesis presented.
Arguments made against proper "debate" mean nothing to my pursuit of truth because I do not need to have a belief one way or the other, I do not need to be right or wrong, I need no debate because I am not presenting my beliefs, and I am not presenting a debate. ok?
I have posted the guides of scientific method which I am following. If you are looking for debate, argument, or to prove your self right or wrong, or to prove me right or wrong, you will find I am not going to give you any of those things because they are not what is being presented Meaning I simply don't pay attention to them because they do not matter to me.
I post this only to try and save people the time they are spending in trying to prove right or wrong or one side or another in this thread. I simply don't care what is viewed as right and wrong or by who in this thread. I just don't, my beliefs are suspended for this search of evidence.
If you wish to prove people wrong, or prove yourself right, it would be very kind of you to make your own thread for that, but if you simply have no respect for my request to stop doing such things there is nothing I can do but keep wasting my time skipping over postings made that are based on right and wrong and in pursuit of "winning" only.
See while all these pointless arguments have been made... some posters have managed to leave their desire/need "to be right or to prove others wrong" out of this thread. There have been some very interesting posts, so it is worth it to me to spend time finding them, and if the pointless stuff keeps making a mess, you can bet I will find those good posts in the mess, and I will thank them for it, I will offer my thoughts of it, and keep scrolling through to find the next legitimate post to the thread purpose.
Please understand... I am not here to "win" an argument, I am not here to "lose" an argument, I do not care if your right or wrong or if I am or anyone else is in this thread. I am here to find evidence of truth as it pertains to the assumed hypothesis given. Simple as that, it really is.
I think I have made myself very clear. I appreciate those who have tried to help me make this point to some, but lets stop wasting our time doing so now and focus on just finding the postings that support the assumed hypothesis. But truly thanks for the efforts expended I wish you had not had to waste your time doing so.
Take care all, Still hoping for more evidence.
me
I am not debating if "God" does, or does not, exist. Quite frankly I don't care if you think he does, or doesn't, or any of that. I have stated an assumed hypothesis and am searching for evidence of its truth. This is the key. I am not searching for right and wrong, I am searching for truth. There is a very big difference in that.
This assumed hypothesis has been defined further in this thread to be "God, as in 'a supreme being who created all things lovingly' does not exist". This assumption is made to seek evidence that refutes this claim. YES, this means it is assumed the defined God does exist for the sake of the search for evidence.
So again...
I am not here to argue on EITHER side of the does or does not debate, because I do not care one way or the other, what I care about here, and the only thing I care about here is the evidence that supports the assumed hypothesis presented.
Arguments made against proper "debate" mean nothing to my pursuit of truth because I do not need to have a belief one way or the other, I do not need to be right or wrong, I need no debate because I am not presenting my beliefs, and I am not presenting a debate. ok?
I have posted the guides of scientific method which I am following. If you are looking for debate, argument, or to prove your self right or wrong, or to prove me right or wrong, you will find I am not going to give you any of those things because they are not what is being presented Meaning I simply don't pay attention to them because they do not matter to me.
I post this only to try and save people the time they are spending in trying to prove right or wrong or one side or another in this thread. I simply don't care what is viewed as right and wrong or by who in this thread. I just don't, my beliefs are suspended for this search of evidence.
If you wish to prove people wrong, or prove yourself right, it would be very kind of you to make your own thread for that, but if you simply have no respect for my request to stop doing such things there is nothing I can do but keep wasting my time skipping over postings made that are based on right and wrong and in pursuit of "winning" only.
See while all these pointless arguments have been made... some posters have managed to leave their desire/need "to be right or to prove others wrong" out of this thread. There have been some very interesting posts, so it is worth it to me to spend time finding them, and if the pointless stuff keeps making a mess, you can bet I will find those good posts in the mess, and I will thank them for it, I will offer my thoughts of it, and keep scrolling through to find the next legitimate post to the thread purpose.
Please understand... I am not here to "win" an argument, I am not here to "lose" an argument, I do not care if your right or wrong or if I am or anyone else is in this thread. I am here to find evidence of truth as it pertains to the assumed hypothesis given. Simple as that, it really is.
I think I have made myself very clear. I appreciate those who have tried to help me make this point to some, but lets stop wasting our time doing so now and focus on just finding the postings that support the assumed hypothesis. But truly thanks for the efforts expended I wish you had not had to waste your time doing so.
Take care all, Still hoping for more evidence.
me
------ This thread is Archived ------
In response to: It made perfect sense to me.
Well how do you expect someone to respond if the question makes no sense to anyone other than yourself? I can not read your mind of course.
In response to: I asked you because you seem to be the one still making an issue of it!
I was asked last night to argue with a gentleman that I had no problem with. So who is making an issue of this?
In response to: I dont think anyone else cared all that much.. they said their bit and left!
So is that what you want? Everyone to leave that does not share the exact same opinion as you? That sounds like a challenge of sorts.
------ This thread is Archived ------
you're a real peace of work arent you .first you start another religious war here and then you say you dont care 
Well I can give you one argument wich will prove god exists if you can agree on the definition of god....
Well I can give you one argument wich will prove god exists if you can agree on the definition of god....
------ This thread is Archived ------
rodolpho: you're a real peace of work arent you .first you start another religious war here and then you say you dont care
Well I can give you one argument wich will prove god exists if you can agree on the definition of god....
Well I can give you one argument wich will prove god exists if you can agree on the definition of god....
I was wondering about that also. We never did sort that argument out. Whose god are we talking about here? Which god are we supposed to not show the evidence for?
------ This thread is Archived ------
rationally no one can prove or dis-prove the existance of an almighty power. From the posts and all the religious beliefs that I've read about, there are so many differing views. What someone may believe is a miracle ,,I could argue that its a scientific phenom. There are indian tribes that still believe dogs are god-like. You mentioned omnipresence,,to me thats the magical chemical reactions of living organisms
------ This thread is Archived ------
Just trying to level out the playin field for you krimsa.You know I got a soft spot for you.
------ This thread is Archived ------
rodolpho: Just trying to level out the playin field for you krimsa.You know I got a soft spot for you.
Actually I started going through and highlighting every post where someone made the comment that "you can not be expected to substantiate a negative." I got up to 4 different people. I think you had said it also.
------ This thread is Archived ------
krimsa: Well how do you expect someone to respond if the question makes no sense to anyone other than yourself? I can not read your mind of course.
I can't help it if you don't get it.
In response to: I was asked last night to argue with a gentleman that I had no problem with.
And I care why?
In response to: So is that what you want? Everyone to leave that does not share the exact same opinion as you? That sounds like a challenge of sorts.
Did I say that? Nope, didn't think so! I LOVE a great discussion!
But don't consider anything that I've seen from you on these forums remotely close to that.
Challenge?
I suspect you would challenge a talking doll if it said something that you didn't like!
Just my humble observation!------ This thread is Archived ------
So first i will give you my definition of god and later i will prove it, first simmer on the definition...
God is in everything
God made everything
God has no end or beginning
God has intelligence
God is order
God is the greatest
So if you can agree on this definition proof will come later.
I want people to think of the statement i made and not just give it, íts to easy anyway.
Remember the hardest problems need the most simple solutions.
I'm of cookin
c u later.
God is in everything
God made everything
God has no end or beginning
God has intelligence
God is order
God is the greatest
So if you can agree on this definition proof will come later.
I want people to think of the statement i made and not just give it, íts to easy anyway.
Remember the hardest problems need the most simple solutions.
I'm of cookin
c u later.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Well if the comment actually was worthwhile and you wanted a response, you should have no trouble explaining what you meant I would hope.
You should care because you presumed that I was somehow starting this argument. Who quoted me this morning and began this childdish tyrade? Do you expect me not to respond? You’ve got another thing coming.
You implied that you wanted everyone to leave who did not share the same opinion as yourself. I feel that is utterly rude. Why don’t you answer my question for the other day?
You should care because you presumed that I was somehow starting this argument. Who quoted me this morning and began this childdish tyrade? Do you expect me not to respond? You’ve got another thing coming.
You implied that you wanted everyone to leave who did not share the same opinion as yourself. I feel that is utterly rude. Why don’t you answer my question for the other day?
------ This thread is Archived ------
That was for wildflower rodolpho, sorry I didnt bother to quote her.
------ This thread is Archived ------
neWildflower:I dont think anyone else cared all that much.. they said their bit and left!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Scubadiva: I haven't read all the posts, so apologies if I repeat what someone might have said earlier.
Proof that god doesn't exist?
Guess what: You can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof always rests with the one making the positive assertion.
Logic 101.
Proof that god doesn't exist?
Guess what: You can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof always rests with the one making the positive assertion.
Logic 101.
Hi, Diva!
Well, as I pointed out earlier in the thread, there is nothing necessarily unprovable about a "negative" (a claim that something "is not") - nor is a positive claim necessarily provable. Depends on the conditions being stipulated.
One way to clarify this is to understand that every negative claim has a positive claim "flip-side" - and vice versa. The positive claim "There is a (Judeo-Christian) God," for instance, can be stated negatively - "The universe cannot exist without an all-powerful creator" - and the negative claim "God does not exist" can be stated "The universe exists on its own." The two kinds of claims are fundamentally the same.
The key question about a claim rests on its credibility - on whether or not it can be practically or theoretically substantiated - not whether or not it's "negative" or "positive." If it cannot be substantiated, or there are formidable obstacles to its substantiation, then one cannot reasonably ask that you assent to it.
The problem with negative claims is that they often (but not necessarily) require a refutation that is either problematic or impossible to substantiate.
------ This thread is Archived ------
krimsa: Well if the comment actually was worthwhile and you wanted a response, you should have no trouble explaining what you meant I would hope.
You should care because you presumed that I was somehow starting this argument. Who quoted me this morning and began this childdish tyrade? Do you expect me not to respond? You’ve got another thing coming.
You implied that you wanted everyone to leave who did not share the same opinion as yourself. I feel that is utterly rude. Why don’t you answer my question for the other day?
You should care because you presumed that I was somehow starting this argument. Who quoted me this morning and began this childdish tyrade? Do you expect me not to respond? You’ve got another thing coming.
You implied that you wanted everyone to leave who did not share the same opinion as yourself. I feel that is utterly rude. Why don’t you answer my question for the other day?
I did!
And of course I expect you to respond to me LOL, you can't help yourself!
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Wondering
What Clothes Do You Feel Comfortable Wearing?
Your Mental Health
Too many fake profiles here ...
When you look inside your heart ? what do you truly want..
Name A Book In The Bible That Begins With The First Letter Of Your Name
How To Secure Your Gate
New here. Single Guy from Grand Rapids, MI.
Isis
Note
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Related Forums
- Wondering
- What Clothes Do You Feel Comfortable Wearing?
- Your Mental Health
- Too many fake profiles here ...
- When you look inside your heart ? what do you truly want..
- Name A Book In The Bible That Begins With The First Letter Of Your Name
- How To Secure Your Gate
- New here. Single Guy from Grand Rapids, MI.
- Isis
- Note
How can you not "debate" the issue? Do you expect us all just to magically agree that a god exists? Do you expect us all to agree that requiring someone to substantiate a negative premise is an illogical debate format?
This comment is clearly non-responsive and makes no sense.
Why don’t you ask anyone who posted this point? I have already listed three different people.